Re: [Cringely] Stanford PhD -- perhaps not...

Ernest Prabhakar (
Mon, 16 Nov 1998 09:18:39 -0800

</param>Y'know, the odd thing about this thread is that nobody has =
questioned the validity of this other claim, to be an international sex =
symbol. Either everyone believes it, or (b) nobody takes it seriously. =
If they don't take that seriously, why should they take the other one?

-- Ernie P.


From: Gregory Alan Bolcer <<>

Date: 1998-11-14 13:21:33 -0800

To: Rohit Khare <<>

Subject: Re: [Cringely] Stanford PhD -- perhaps not...=20


In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 12 Nov 1998 16:01:31 PST." =

X-UIDL: a050654950ab3866e0624e290438cd7f

Get Dick to give him an honorary UCI-ICS one. No other

reason that we just like him. =20


> [The bit about having the bravura to ask to return to the Stanford

> program and complete a dissertation is particularly rich. On the =

> hand, the whole piece does little justice to Bob's actual talents, =

> are not inconsiderable. They're just not doctoral... RK]


> =


> PBS analyst falsely claims Stanford Ph.D


> By Marni Leff

> Senior staff writer